They Induce Empathy for The Murderer – Demonizing The Dead

Posted by addisethiopia on July 18, 2013

Many have noticed that last Sunday, neither justice nor the truth were served when George Zimmerman was found not guilty of killing seventeen year old Trayvon Martin. In fact, this was the latest example of a travesty of justice and a manipulation and bastardization of the truth. Zimmermann was set free, but he ain’t free, he knows what he has done, the terrible crime he committed will haunt him all the time, he is a coward, he doesn’t deserve the name “George”, the George we know was a Martyr, a Saint.

While almost all the medias want us to see the gangsta picture of the murdered teenager, Trayvon Martin, they show the polished, smiling photos of the murderer so that we could justify the murderer by thinking, “a good reason to have a ‘neighborhood watch like Zimmerman”

The above picture was popular among all those who induced empathy for Zimmerman, and its popularity is an example of where we are today. Many people cannot stand to hear about modern racism towards minorities. Any mention of race immediately brings comments about “the race card” or “race baiting.” Their narrative is that the white race is really the race that suffers the most racism in America. And so, they jump on any rumor or alleged evidence which might confirm their belief that Zimmerman is innocent. They probably would never admit to being racist, and perhaps they don’t even believe that they are racist, but their passionate denial that race figured into this tragedy and their willingness to accept any “evidence” to support that presupposition suggests otherwise.

The Living should never judge the dead

You see, they judge the dead, make him look like a bad guy, an offender, and demonize him, while setting murderers like Zimmerman free, and rewarding them with guns. Trying to demonize the deadkid is franknly reprehensible, only cowards do demonize the deadto justify their wrongs

Similarly, another morally reprehensible thing could be observed with the latest controversy concerning the Boston Marathon bomber. The August issue of the music magazine, “Rolling Stones“ features a photo of Boston Marathon bombings suspect Dzhokhar Tsarnaev on the cover. The vast majority of people won’t read the article written inside the magazine. So, the magazine is attempting to apply the graphic power by portraying this particular murderer as a “rock star”, an innocent victim of a failed society.

In their twisted minds, “Heartbreaking account” means one thing: poor Jahar is just a victim of outside forces and circumstances, so you should feel sorry for him (like Zimmerman) with your broken heart. What about the heartbreaking stories of his victims, who apparently don’t rate as rock stars by Rolling Stone, as the magazine has not given them this much attention?. Well, it won’t be surprising if they put up a monument for him in downtown Boston, as they were planing to build a mosque at Ground Zero, New York.

Dear Robert Zimmerman, Jr.:

Given that bashing Black people seems to be the family pastime, I imagine you don’t care much about what I think about you and your murderous, racist brother. However, considering you have spent the last year of your life spending as much time in front of the camera as much as humanly possible, maybe your megalomania compels you to read whatever appears in your Google Alerts. No matter the option, though, you and all that you represent are a poison that an already soiled media climate doesn’t need and it’s time more people stated such.

Frankly, I knew you weren’t worth even a decimeter of a damn long ago, but you truly proved how awful a person you were when you posted a picture of Trayvon Martin, a shooting victim of your vigilante, faux-Eddie Valiant brother side-by-side with that of the alleged killer of a 13-month-old baby back in March.

Who could forget that caption: “A picture speaks a thousand words. Any questions?”

I have a few. Starting with outside of their complexion and a photo with a raised middle finger, what did those two even have in common? Second question: Why is it that news networks like CNN and HLN continue to give you a platform to spew your falsehoods and thinly-veiled racist rants? Are ratings that important that a supposed news network is willing to allow some bigoted brother of another bigot go on-air and disparage Black people as if we’re nothing?

Bonus round: Can you guess which finger I’d like to wave right in front of you at this very moment?

There, you said, “I want to know what makes people angry enough to attack someone the way that Trayvon Martin did. I want to know, if it is true, and I don’t know that it was true, that Trayvon Martin was looking to procure firearms, was growing marijuana plants, or was making lean, or whatever he was doing. I want to know that every minor, high schooler, that would be reaching out in some way for help—and they may feel it’s by procuring firearms or whatever they may be doing—that they have some kind of help.”

This is the part where you should’ve been checked.Trayvon Martin isn’t the one with the extensive criminal history, your brother is—a fact you routinely ignore.

Isn’t it George Zimmerman who has been accused of domestic violence? Was it not George arrested and charged with “resisting officer with violence” and “battery of law enforcement officer?” Those were felony charges he escaped after entering an alcohol education program. And then later that year, Zimmerman’s ex-fiancé, Veronica Zuazo, filed a civil motion for a restraining order, alleging domestic violence. A year later, he was charged with speeding. Can’t forget about the woman who accused Georgie of molesting her either.

If there’s any “punk” walking around angry with substance abuse issues and a blatant disregard for authority, it’s George Zimmerman, not the child he murdered. But thanks to people like you, it was Trayvon who went on trial for his own murder, not the killer.

Suffice to say, you can take the following disingenuous question of your brother’s critics, swallow it whole and choke: “I wonder how many people at these rallies calling for his death, calling for his capture dead or alive, I wonder how many of them mentored African American children?”

The same goes for this silly little declaration: “I think it’s a time now going forward when we should start to ask really tough questions about why it was so hard for us to conceive of the likelihood that perhaps Trayvon Martin really did attack George this way and ask tough questions about, ‘Are we not willing to accept that because of race?’”

Do you want to know why Black people get angry? Because scum of the Earth like George Zimmerman can walk around with a gun and false sense of superiority, stop an unarmed Black child and begin an altercation with him, shoot him after he starts losing the fight he began and then end up not serving any prison time for it – plus getting the gun back to boot.

How ironic for you to say: “It’s a reality that some people don’t respect this verdict and think that they want to take justice into their own hands.”

The most horrific aspect of it all is that not only can George Zimmerman get away with a racially-charged murder, his simple-minded, equally-prejudiced brother can make a media career out of it.

Rachel Jeantel Gets the Trayvon Martin Treatment

[Exodus 4:10- ]”Moses said to the Lord,”O Lord, I have never been eloquent,neither in the past nor since you spoke to your servant. I am slow of speech and tongue.”

But, God chose Moses!

“God chose what is foolish in the world to shame the wise; God chose what is weak in the world to shame the strong; God chose what is low and despised in the world, even things that are not, to bring to nothing things that are, so that no human being might boast in the presence of God.”[ 1 Corinthians 1:27–29]

Rachel Jeantel can’t read cursive. That’s the main takeaway from the fourth day of the George Zimmerman trial: Jeantel, snappy prosecution witness who was on the phone with her friend Trayvon Martin minutes before he died, cannot read script handwriting. Defense attorney Don West underlined that fact for the benefit of the jury, the general public, and everyone else looking for an excuse to dismiss her testimony.

Given the extent to which Jeantel’s demeanor was covered on television and in news articles, you’d be excused for thinking—as Jezebel’s Callie Beusman put it—that she was the one on trial. Over the past couple of days, Jeantel has recounted that Martin told her he was being followed by a “creepy-ass cracker” who, it seems, then proceeded to attack him. Pundits, meanwhile, have made snickering observations that have had little to do with the substance of her testimony. They’ve criticized Jeantel’s weight, her attitude, her manner of dress, and her mumbling, inarticulate answers to West’s questions. These observations are generally framed as discussions of her credibility and how she’ll be received by the jury. But they’re also an excuse to point and laugh at a poor, black teenager who comes from an America that we’d rather not acknowledge exists.

The media has consistently treated Jeantel as if she were some sassy alien life-form. The New York Daily Newsstory about yesterday’s proceedings focused on Jeantel-as-sideshow, calling the cursive story an “especially cringe-worthy moment,” and noting that, “[a]t one point, the key prosecution witness blurted out, ‘That’s retarded, Sir’ in response to West’s suggestion that Martin attacked Zimmerman.” On Piers Morgan Tonight, Morgan repeated the phrase “creepy-ass cracker” as if it were some inscrutable bit of baby talk. The day before, panelist Jayne Weintraub disdainfully asserted that “it’s really not about this young woman’s … credibility, because her credibility, it’s a wash whatever her testimony is. Yes, she was a difficult witness. She was impossible.”

If the established media was patronizing, many Internet users were outright cruel.

As Beusman put it at Jezebel, “social media users have heavily criticized Jeantel’s hair, her body, her grammar, her perceived (lack of) intelligence, her diction, and her attitude.” Hurdler Lolo Jones tweeted, “Rachel Jeantel looked so irritated during the cross-examination that I burned it on DVD and I’m going to sell it as Madea goes to court.” Somebody made another movie reference “this girl Rachel Jeantel looks like precious. Right? Where was her KFC?” And lest you think this is all coming from white people, much of “black Twitter” spent yesterday mocking Jeantel and her “ghetto” image. As another Twitter user wrote: “Its no excuse to use age for Rachel Jeantel’s demeanor. Her attitude & grammar is playing right into stereotypes about black women.”

The implication of all the social media chatter and news coverage is clear: Rachel Jeantel was out of place in a courtroom. The flipside of that implication is clear, too: Rachel Jeantel should go back to the ghetto where she belongs. In fact, that’s the whole point of the Trayvon Martin case, which has become a referendum on how comfort and privilege deal with the unfamiliar. Before Martin died, he was dehumanized. No matter whose story you believe, it’s clear that George Zimmerman looked at a young black kid walking through a gated community and decided that he wasn’t supposed to be there. He responded by following him, approaching him, and … it’s up to you to decide what you think happened next.

The dehumanization of Rachel Jeantel—the laughter, the disbelief—is rooted in the same attitude that causes people to treat unarmed black kids with suspicion, to follow them around subdivisions for no good reason. I rarely agree with Nancy Grace, but yesterday on HLN she made a decent point. “Oh, everybody can laugh all they want to. She can’t read cursive. Or that she has nicknames she goes by that some people may laugh at; this one is ‘Diamond Eugene.’ You know what? Laugh all you want to. Nobody ever said that a murder trial was a tea party, where everybody had perfect manners and spoke perfectly. That’s not what this is about.”

And she’s right. A lot of the people in our jails and prisons come from poor black neighborhoods, and the witnesses in their trials are often made uncomfortable by courtrooms and judges and aggressive defense attorneys. Dismissing them and what they have to say because of their grammar and demeanor says more about us than it does about them. Rachel Jeantel can’t understand cursive. We can’t understand Rachel Jeantel. Which is worse?